Can You Keep From Losing?

[FloridaPhil]

For me, video poker is not a profitable enterprise. I read posts where other players claim to be long term winners. I read books where people claim to go from playing quarter VP to winning millions of dollars. I have concluded that either they aren't playing the same games I play or they have some attribute or talent that I do not possess. In either case, playing VP where I play it is a loser and always will be. For this reason, I have concluded that playing bigger than I do now will only make matters worse. As it is currently, I am happy with the cost and the casino is happy to have me play at their facility.

There are many more players like me than long term profitable players. I asked for the Recreational Forum not to have a place where we could argue the merits of playing VP for profit. I asked for it so we could have a place where players who play VP for entertainment could discuss the game without being called names and having every word we say dissected to it's most minute meaning.

I could care less if someone wants to believe they can beat the casinos and is willing to put their money up to try. I don't. I want to discuss VP as I see it, not the 1% who think anyone who does not profit from VP is somehow inferior. Go ahead and play the way you want. I wish you well. I'm rooting for you. If you win a million dollars, it would be great to see your smiling photo on the website. I won't envy you, I'll be happy for you. I also will not beat myself up because it wasn't me holding the check.

[Player422738]

Luck is only needed if you have a lack of an edge, especially dealing with something you have no control on it.

[Tedlark]

Phil the statement you made: "There are many more players like you than long term profitable players" is pretty broad. If it were to be disected, do you mean that there are many more "Entertainment Players" like you than long term profitable players?

If yes, I would really question that. Are you saying that there are more players who only play for the "entertainment" they get from playing video poker in a casino and not going into a casino thinking that they may win a few bucks and come out with more than they walked into the casino with?

[OTABILL]

My mom always told me.....your life can change in 2 shakes of a lambs tail. The best we all can do is to go on, be respectful and caring to others, and watch your p's and q's. My mom was one very smart lady and is greatly missed. What was left of her family survived the civil war, World War 1, and World War 2. Nobody in the family served in the Korean War which is another nearly forgotten one. Her children somehow survived Viet Nam and are still here today to hopefully carry on and do good in her absence. I'm just emphasizing what OttaBill just said and what Florida Phil has been recently been posting about. Now, if anyone remembers quote 2 shakes of a lambs tail, you are older than me.

Olds was spot on regarding his understanding of my post. The point I was making regarding not hitting a single line royal in Vegas was to illustrate that long term is not guaranteed and not about anything else. I brought it because it is on my bucket list. Given the replies and questions it generated I want to respond. Both my wife and I have been casual recreational players. We have never counted how many hands we have played nor do we have a VP bankroll. Instead, we have always discretionary funds set aside for recreational/entertainment expenditures. These include everything from taking vacations, going to concerts, dining out, and going to a local casino for a night out. Trips to V have an all-inclusive budget. I would submit the vast majority of casual recreational players probably think the same way and that the serious recreational VP players who post here do not represent the casual/recreational VP players.

Concerning the Nevada trips, I would estimate that during the 12 years my wife and I have gone to Vegas/Laughlin together, we made about 18 trips ( 1 ½ per year) ranging from 3 -7 days each. The drought in one line royals during this period was for both of us. In fact, my wife plays faster than I do. As pointed out our results while well beyond what we could have expected are not unheard of given the reality of playing VP.

[FloridaPhil]

Are you saying that there are more players who only play for the "entertainment" they get from playing video poker in a casino and not going into a casino thinking that they may win a few bucks and come out with more than they walked into the casino with?

Everyone wants to win. Everyone has the same chance of being a short term winner. When the machine deals a royal flush, it doesn't check to see if you know the math, can do a computer simulation or have played perfectly.

What this post was originally about was playing to keep from losing. That is a different approach than playing to win long term. The point I was making was you can't avoid losing all the time. As usual, my post morphed into a discussion of the long term profitability of VP.

As they walk into the casino, all players expect to win. When they walk out, most players don't. That is what keeps the casino's doors open. Some players shrug off their losses as part of the game. Some players become discouraged and don't go back. Others attempt to reduce their losses by changing how they play. The few players that have access to positive games and good comps may make a profit.

I can't change the odds in Tampa. I like to play VP all day. I don't like to take big risks with my money in a casino. I probably play more hands in a week than anyone else on this forum with the exception of Old442jetaway. I have met Olds and he is not crazy or stupid. I have never heard him claim to be a long term winner. He plays because he enjoys the game. I do too.

I think most players would be better off if they understood that the casino is not here to fund anyone's lifestyle. They know you will win sometimes. You may even hit them for a big jackpot. Sooner or later, odds are you will give it back. Casinos never go out of business because APs beat their games. They go out of business because players don't go back or there are too many casinos in a market.

A perfect example of this is "Bob Dancer" himself. Everyone knows he never plays unless he has an advantage. The tells everyone that he lives a great lifestyle playing the games and I am not disputing that. The casinos let him play anyway. He even teaches players how to beat the casino in a casino! If that doesn't prove my point, what does?

We can argue forever if it is possible to beat VP long term. We can view computer simulations and math that prove this is true. The reality is only a tiny few make this happen. I am among the vast majority that can't. I know my limitations. I know the games I have to play are negative. I know negative VP games are unbeatable long term. I'm OK with that. The only thing I can change is my coin in. Fortunately, the casino lets me play VP on my terms. Some day they may block the coin button or put a meter on the machines. When that happens, I will move on to something else.

[markinca]

A perfect example of this is "Bob Dancer" himself. Everyone knows he never plays unless he has an advantage. The tells everyone that he lives a great lifestyle playing the games and I am not disputing that. The casinos let him play anyway. He even teaches players how to beat the casino in a casino! If that doesn't prove my point, what does?

I've never been to a Dancer class so anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Dancer is teaching classes on the ins and outs of being an AP. He's teaching classes on how to play various video poker games optimally. There's a big difference between the two. The former loses the casino money. The latter makes the casino money.

[FloridaPhil]

I've never been to a Dancer class so anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Dancer is teaching classes on the ins and outs of being an AP. He's teaching classes on how to play various video poker games optimally. There's a big difference between the two. The former loses the casino money. The latter makes the casino money.

I have never been in one of his classes either. I think you brought up a good point. Bob's classes teach people to keep more of their money and I think that's a great thing to do. Bob has stated many times on this forum that an APs profits do not all come directly from the game itself. They rightfully add comps, incentives and drawings to their total. He is not going to hand people a map that shows where a casino is making an error or has a player advantaged opportunity. What you could say he is doing is teaching most people to be smaller losers. I don't know how many of his students turn out to be successful APs. I would imagine very few.

What I want players to know is there is another way to be a smaller loser without having to fly to Vegas and attend a class. That way is to limit your "coin in". Beatable VP games are rare and getting rarer. Playing small does not necessarily mean playing quarters or playing single coin. There are many ways to limit "coin in". My personal choices are made because they fit my goal of playing as many hands in a day as cheap as possible. Your personal goal may be different than mine. You need to know what your goal is and match it with what is possible.

[Eduardo]

It amazes me just how many times you can repeat that betting less money will result in losing less money.

If someone doesn't understand that quarters are worth less than dollars, they need to be in first grade, not a casino.

This is why experts don't teach this. Because it is obvious.

[New2vp]

Eduardo! Amazed? Did you expect anything different? Certainly you were not planning on learning anything, were you? How about a thought experiment and a riddle?

Imagine how many of FP's 4600+ posts would still be there if you removed all the posts that were logically incorrect, contradictory, trite/obvious, repetitive, espoused a theory that he has since rebuked, or in which he has misquoted or misunderstood another … or simply ignored the major point of another and continued on one of the above tangents.

Other than that, I'm sure he's got to be a nice, normal individual, perhaps just a trifle obsessive … if you could just remove the keyboard from his reach.

Which poster could you imagine wrote both of these gems?

A. I believe I can match intelligence with Bob Dancer any day.
B. Constantly having to remind the world how smart you are is a sign of insecurity.

Hint: I won't spoil it for those who want to guess at the answer to the riddle, but one of those quotes is in this very thread. You can practice using the search feature to find the other.

[FloridaPhil]

Here is a riddle for you. Suppose you want to play VP all day on a budget and all you have available is 96% games? This is the goal of many retirees in our area. What would you do? The only choices I see are to play as slow as possible or as small as possible. Are there any others I missed?

What you guys are missing is that not all players have big bankrolls. They have more time than money. Many don't have access to positive games. They want to enjoy the game, but they can't afford to risk their entire pension check on a strategy that only works for a few. If you wish to ignore these players, so be it. Those are the players I am talking to.